True
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 41 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
Hard to parse through the corporate propaganda to find the official reason that they were banned. Most outlets are just saying that it was for “misinformation about COVID-19″ which could mean anything. The Guardian claims it was for ” posting numerous videos which denied the existence of Covid-19 or encouraged people to use hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin” but no specific videos are actually mentioned. Sites that list specific videos only mention videos where doctors discussed the pros and cons of using hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. Furthermore, Sky News Australia has put out a statement denying that they have ever said or implied that COVID-19 does not exist and says that none of their videos have ever been removed for this reason.
I think it’s likely that they are using a sly “mathematician’s or” here, in that they say “we removed many videos which said COVID-19 was fake or discussed alternative treatment options” and then if they are pressed on which videos said COVID-19 were fake they can say “well, none did, but our statement was technically true because the videos we did remove did discuss alternative treatment options.”
It’s a bit like if you had a channel where you posted a video swearing at your neighbor for being loud all night and youtube said “we closed this channel because of several videos where the creator expressed the intent to rape, to overthrow the government, or used foul language.”
Like Hitler, Mao, Stalin, et al your self-appointed, seemingly omnipotent media/tech titans fear and loath: free assembly, free association, free press, free speech.
In short, they hate Freedom and Truth like Satan hates Holy Water.
The test of free speech is whether what I consider offensive, misinformation, or just outright lies is protected. The personal protection lay in libel and slander law. This definition was once held and acknowledged by most. Apparently, no more. A great setback for maintaining a free nation.